OPINION: Same-sex marriage not just moral issue

Opinion article published in the Newcastle Herald co-authored by Professor Scott Holmes, Pro Vice-Chancellor (Research) and Dean of Graduate Studies, and Sam Bright, a research officer, from the University of Newcastle.

All citizens should have the same rights and obligations in society. As such, gay couples should have the same right to marry under the Marriage Act. Given that the moral and social-rights arguments don’t seem to be getting us to this point, let’s try an economic argument.

Last year there were 121,752 marriages registered in Australia. According to business and economic analysts IBISWorld, the wedding industry generated $4.3 billion in revenue in 2011, an amount that they expect to rise to $4.7 billion in 2016. In terms of contribution to GDP, this equates to around $1.8 billion this year.

The primary economic boost would come through the direct injection of money spent on a wedding.

The research by IBISWorld also found the average cost of a wedding in Australia in 2012 was $36,700, and the wedding industry is one of the few that is bucking the trend of economic slowdown.

Data from the 2011 census showed there are around 33,700 same-sex couples living in Australia (and this number is thought to be a conservative finding because it is expected there is some unwillingness by people to identify themselves as same-sex couples in the census). The actual figure could be much higher. It also fails to take into account those in same-sex relationships that do not live together, or those currently not in a relationship but may wish to marry when they meet the right partner. Overall the 33,700 represents about 0.7 per cent of the total number of couples in Australia, a percentage that is consistent with other countries such as New Zealand and Canada.

Using the ABS figures as a starting point, if half of the same-sex couples who identified themselves in the 2011 census got married next year, at an average cost of $36,700, it would be worth around $600 million to the Australian economy, or $1.2 billion if all couples tied the knot. That $600 million would provide 14 per cent growth to an industry currently expected to grow at around 1.4 per cent.

If other factors remain consistent this would increase the wedding industry’s contribution to GDP to over $2 billion. In this respect, the value of legalising gay marriage to the economy is over $200 million.

On top of this, IBISWorld notes that older couples tend to spend more on their wedding because they have had more time to save money, and are more likely to know what they want when it comes to their dream day. Considering gay marriage would only have just become legal, it’s likely the average age of same-sex couples marrying would be higher than the average age of heterosexual couples (for heterosexuals this is 29.6 years for men and 27.9 years for women, while the majority of same-sex partners fall into the age bracket 35-44 years). Therefore the potential economic benefits are even greater than those envisaged above.

The economic benefits of legalising same-sex marriage may not just be limited to the marriage of Australians. Currently there are 11 countries in the world that allow same-sex marriages, leaving a huge proportion in which same-sex marriage is illegal. Through legalising same-sex marriage, the commonwealth government opens the door for a potentially huge addition to the tourism industry.

In the United States alone there are an estimated 9 million people that identify as gay, lesbian or bisexual. In the US, same-sex marriage is legal in only nine states, while some states recognise same-sex marriages performed in other jurisdictions but not their own.

Hypothetically, there are potentially 4.5 million same-sex couples that could form from these 9 million people. If Australia could attract even 3 per cent of these couples to wed down under, the 135,000 extra weddings would more than double the 121,752 of 2011.

If the average cost is the same for these weddings, this means an additional $4.9 billion in revenue, and around $2 billion extra in terms of the wedding industry’s contribution to GDP. And that is just the potential benefit from same-sex couples from the US.

Other industries, especially tourism, could also benefit from the legalisation of same-sex marriage.

Using the US numbers above, 135,000 additional weddings each with 20 attendees would be an extra 2.7 million visitors to Australia. This would increase the 6 million short-term visitors who entered Australia in 2011-12 by 45 per cent.

Considering these facts and figures, if people (including our Prime Minister) can’t justify equal rights for all citizens through legalisation of same-sex marriage on social and moral grounds, they should at least be able to do so on economic grounds.

Share this post

8 thoughts

As a natural institution, the lasting union of a man and a woman who agree to give and receive rights over each other for the performance of the act of generation and for the fostering of their mutual love.

The state of marriage implies four chief conditions: 1. there must be a union of opposite sexes; it is therefore opposed to all forms of unnatural, homosexual behavior; 2. it is a permanent union until the death of either spouse; 3. it is an exclusive union, so that extramarital acts are a violation of justice; and 4. its permanence and exclusiveness are guaranteed by contract; mere living together, without mutually binding themselves to do so, is concubinage and not marriage.

Christ elevated marriage to a sacrament of the New Law. Christian spouses signify and partake of the mystery of that unity and fruitful love which exists between Christ and his Church, helping each other attain to holiness in their married life and in the rearing and education of their children.

The fact that the author of this article has resorted to economic arguments to validate an untenable position on the sacrament of marriage is quite revealing as to how secular culture views marriage. This is primarily not about morals or equal rights. It is about breaking down the sacrament of marriage to validate people’s own sexual behaviours.

The author should consider the implications of statements such as his first “all citizens should have the same rights and obligations in society”. This sweeping and erroneous statement is intended to validate a person’s emotional bond as a singularly valid reason for being able to marry. The implication of such a position is that any human could marry not only from either sex, but also more than one person, or even their pet – in fact anything that they may have an emotional bond to. This is not marriage. This is not love. So called same sex marriage is nothing short of an assault on marriage and by extension, an assault on Christian teaching and Christianity.

I think we can all agree that marriage is something that is performed irrelevant of religion. Heterosexual Australian citizens are permitted to marry whether they define themselves as Christian, Muslim, Jew or even athiest. To label same sex marriage as an ‘assault on marriage/chritianity’ or anything similar should be seen as completely beside the point when marriage isnt something specifically performed by those of the christian or catholic faith. We must remember that although christianty is the majority religion in our nation, it is not the ONLY religion, and we need to acknowledge not just other religious views but also the views of those who choose to not belong to any faith. It is completely understood by all that homosexuality is not something endorsed by the bible, let alone most religions. However enforcing the teachings of YOUR religion and arguing that the best interests of this nation and its people fit that religion is a complete arguemental and logical fallacy. If a homosexual (or any) person chooses to be a member of a religion they, of course, should obide by the teachings of that religion. Otherwise, it seems, they should seek spiritual enlightenment elsewhere. The vast majority of homosexual people in the world do not belong to the christian faith and therefore should never be forced to abide by their morals and beliefs. As free people we are given the right to choose our religion and follow the path of that religion accordingly. no person of any faith (whether that faith be the majority faith or not) has the right to socially discredit any person for not following the teachings of anothers faith, especially if they are not a believer in said faith.
Although many teachings from the Christian faith have been adopted in Australian and western society it is doing our great multicultural nation an injustice to completely adhere to one in particular, and not respect those who want to marry and are part of no religion. Over 20% of Australia’s population is of no religious affiliation, and i can guarantee you that many of those will be married, heterosexual couples. They aren’t members of the Christian faith, yet are able to happily be acknowledged as a married couple under Australian law.
The authors statement of “all citizens should have the same rights and obligations in society” is entirely plausible and is in complete accordance with a number of articles in the declaration of human rights. your arguement, however, that the author means any kind of emotional bond permits one to marry, is implausible to say the least. If you read the statement a second time you’ll notice the author used the word ‘citizens’ and i can guarantee you that a dog, cat or any other pet you had in mind is NOT an Australian citizen. You also seem to forget the implications of your own statements, in that by saying what you did, you placed homosexual people on the same societal credibility level as those of animals. Homosexual people ARE people, and should be permitted to marry (if not a member of a religion that prohibits it) due to the fact that they have the same rights as any other heterosexual, bisexual, transgender or asexual person would. A strong emotional bond with another person is called love, you speak as if 2 people of the same sex who share a strong emotional bond with one another are not in love. The only, and i repeat only, person who can define the extent of their emotional bond with another is the person feeling the emotional connection, not a religion, not a community and certainly not you.
You, and (unfortunately) the vast majority of Australian people need to also remember the fact that society is not something concrete. It is forever evolving and changing to fit the needs of the present people accordingly. To use a 2000 year old definition to back up your argument is almost completely arbitrary, due to the fact that definitions from much earlier time periods allowed for religious presecution, forbade women to vote and encouraged the kidnapping and slavery of many racial groups and we both know that those ‘definitions’ are now irrelevant to today’s society. To also assume that the beliefs that all secular people hold on marriage are in accordance with the authors’ opinions is quite ignorantly presumptuous. The author is simply providing an alternate arguement to support gay marriage, so as to provide readers with a different perspective on the issue. I commend the author for publishing such an article, and suggest you, Paul, should re-think your arguement even though “you have just as much right to freedon of expression as i do” -Section 2, Article 19, Declaration of Human Rights.

Right an wrong points…
Your artical is mostly correct depending on what your bias towards…
You see anything can be validated if your convicted about it.
The christian or possibly christian artical above seems wary of the impacts of gay marriage will have on societies socail structure for the future. You are right about marriage not just being for christians though you are wrong that gay marriage is erelevent and should not be challanged by christians.
I suppose you are refering to christian monopoly on marriage.
Your right there has been a monopoly on marriage and its definition by christians for centuries but because they want to protect socail order.
Your right that being gay has been looked at badly by the church.

But there are some things to consider…. that will be real possibilities for the future once society completely sanctifys gay marriage between people.

Lets just for your benefit talk about people and not animals.
Your right in saying that 2 persons at least have the right to love each other. So why not extend to marriage..?
There implications with that….if we take out the man and woman and replace it with either same sex, cousins, children, parents and children, test tube babies and cloned people which we now have the capacity to achieve today…and lets just say we allow multiple partners in a marriage regardless of who they are and their gender to marry.
Well in your world theres not much wrong with that because we are talking about loving relationships between people who genuinly love each other and are not affiliated to the church.
Whats wrong with that…? Well this is the problem….over many centuries morals and ethics have been put in place for a reason…sure many religions havnt got it right but there has been some sort of socail order…
But once you start sanctifying things out side of that socail order then it opens the door to other things. There are a certain amount of christian beliefs in the constitutions of the west. Especially within the 5 eyes. Usa, eng, can, aus, New Zealand and usa. But voting power and money are also moulding the outcome of new laws so that all departments are managed well.
Cutting to the chase…the story of Noah…anyone who has read the bible or watch movies and tv shows knows how noah built an ark when god flooded the world and killed all living things….the story goes on to say it was because people went their own way…..
I suppose the ones who were destroyed didnt need to have the godly values imposed on their belief system…..
I suppose deep down past all of the debating are the christians who are sincere trying to protect a sort of ..how do we say it…domino effect and I suppose they see the dangers of a long forgoten past repeating itself.
No ones perfect and we all have problems and I suppose anything that happens from here on in is going to happen anyway..
For 2 reasons..for the christians it saids it will happen in their bible..there just trying to slow it down….and the other reason is because once you start taking away religious structures that have had christian influence then what will replace it….
People say who cares it the here and now that matters and under this system right now all people have the right to be happy and free…..you see what we are doing is handing over more authority to the govt to create laws as more states around the world come together as a united force….
So lets have a baby….we will go testube…we will make it a boy, we will give it brown eyes, genetical change its genes, clone it from your father, put the egg back inside your fathers grandmother, no wait…we will make it transexual…..clone it 1000 times then get all the children to marry as females can carry frozen eggs from their great great grandfathers….and the other well…we wont use them to make babies…we’ll just clone them from a test tube and use other clones for body parts to the highest bidder.

Sounds like some freaky scify movie doesnt it but we stir near the capabilities of that right now…..who are we to say what is right and wrong morally. ??
Is it up to the voters..?
The person who is your enemy today may be your friend tomorrow when its time for dealing with greater evils…..

Not only is the purpose of marriage patently not to generate revenue for the economy, but it is not even a revenue generator – the ludicrous amounts being spent are funds that are not going into the family home or business – weddings don’t generate any revenue at all, they just (mis)allocate existing funds.

Good communication is a must to develop the healthy relationships in your married life. You should share all your problems and feelings with your partner as well listen to your partner and understand. Make some time for each other to share your emotions. Go for outing with your partner and make some romantic plans for short vacation.-’..*

Marriage equality is not about changing the definition of marriage, it’s about expanding the current definition to embrace those who have been excluded.

Having equality in this world would make life less of a struggle for those who suffer. Equality isn’t just about evening things out or making things better for another, it’s about having peace and justice in this world.

We all need to understand that every human on this earth are similar in one way or another. We have beating hearts, we have blood flowing through our bodies and we have feelings one way or another. Just because others having different feelings and attractions to things you may not, or things you may not consider as to be ‘normal’, does not indicate that they cannot be accepted into our secular society. We live in a world full of prejudice and a way we can stop this is to have Equality in our everyday lives. Giving people a chance to really become who they are gives confidence to all and is demonstrating what us Australian’s can do to live a more equal lifestyle.

Marriage equality is a way to start a world you are proud to live in. National Pride is all we strive for! Making us Australians the best we can be!

Benefits to children from marriage equality range from various reasons. Three of these include it gives the children a greater sense of belonging, greater sense of legitimacy and also societal recognition and validation of their family. From the Australian marriage equality website it is a proven fact that about 25% of female couples and 15% of male couples are raising children. Experts are agreeing that children are not disadvantaged by being raised by same-sex couple’s except insofar as their families are legally discriminated against.

Benefits of marriage equality isn’t just about letting the gay couples marry. It’s more than that in numerous ways. These include: Improvement to Australians human rights reputation, it would provide at least $160 million over three years to small businesses in the wedding industry and having bolters marriage by showing its commitment that counts – not gender.

Here are some proven facts about the level of support Australia shows from the Australian marriage equality website:
- 62% of Australians support marriage equality (2012)
- 81% of young Australians (18-24 years of age) support marriage equality
- 75% of Australians believe marriage equality is inevitable

By these numbers, we all should realise that it is an acknowledged action however it needs to be accepted in our society.

Marriage creates a unique bond between partners and their families from which same-sex partners are excluded and there needs to be a stop to that.